In looking at the rules for the CQWW, it seems to be very clear:
A.Single Operator Categories: Single band or all band; only one signal is allow
at any one time; the operator may change bands at any time.
Single Operator High: Those stations at which one person all of the operating,
logging, and spotting functions. The use of DX alerting assistance of any kind
places the station in the Single Operator Assisted category.
In short – use a spotting network, you are ASSISTED.
If in doubt, read the rules. Helps to avoid any unpleasant surprises!
Tom
----- Original Message -----
From: Robert Naumann <w5ov@w5ov.com>
Date: Monday, November 12, 2007 8:41 am
Subject: [CQ-Contest] To be assisted or not to be assisted: that is the
question. (long)
To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> With apologies to Shakespeare and to those who don't like long
> messages.
> Enough has been said about this and other subjects recently, and
> I think it
> is time to put this behind us. How can we do that?
>
> The key is a common understanding of what being assisted is, and
> it must be
> a much narrower definition than what many seem to believe. The other
> misinterpretation is around what triggers can force a single-op
> to cross the
> line into being assisted. Instead, they more likely push him
> into being a
> multi-op... more on that later.
>
> The CQWW rules make fairly clear those activities allowed for a Single
> Operator Assisted entry.
>
> The rule states for Single Operator Assisted: (combining all
> applicableportions)
>
> Single band or all band; only one signal allowed at any one
> time; the
> operator may change bands at any time. Those stations at which
> one person
> performs all of the operating, logging, and spotting functions.
> The passive
> (self-spotting not allowed) use of DX spotting nets is allowed.
>
> This is pretty simple. Let's focus on what it actually says.
>
> 1) It says that *one person* performs *all* operating, logging
> and spotting
> functions. Focus here: "One person performs all". This does not
> includeconsulting with others, asking for help in finding
> multipliers, asking
> someone else to hold your frequency, etc. This also does not
> include having
> someone else at your station "assisting" you in looking for
> multipliers or
> making qsos on other bands while you run on another band. (Yes,
> this gross
> misinterpretation has happened.)
>
> 2) The *passive* use of spotting networks is allowed. What does
> passivemean? It means that you don't actively consult with
> others or ask for help -
> you *alone* either submit unsolicited information to the
> spotting network or
> you utilize what is posted there unsolicited by someone else. In
> contrast,active use would include posting things like "please
> post VY1 - I need it
> for a sweep" or "spot the Zone 18 on 40 again please"!
>
> So being assisted should not allow for the *active* use of help
> from others,
> packet / internet clusters / spotting networks etc.
>
> The ARRL "HF Contesting - Good Practices, Interpretations and
> Suggestions"(http://www.arrl.org/contests/hf-faq.html#during) says:
>
> 6) Spotting and Use of Spots
> a) Self-spotting
> Self-spotting is the practice of announcing your own call and run
> frequency on the spotting network. A few contests have
> categories that
> allow self-spotting, but most don't. For example, ARRL contest rules
> specifically prohibit both self-spotting and requesting spotting by
> other stations. It's a form of CQ-ing that does not take place
> on the
> amateur bands, just a step away from making phone calls to solicit
> contacts. Read the rules of the contest to find out if self-
> spotting isallowed.
>
> So, even though the ARRL rules may seem to allow for
> collaboration with
> others:
>
> "2.2.1.Use of spotting assistance or nets (operating arrangements
> involving other individuals, DX-alerting nets, packet, etc) not
> physically located at the station is permitted.
>
> It is apparent that the interpretation of this does not include self
> spotting or requesting spotting by others.
>
> I have a problem with "operating arrangements involving other
> individuals"definition of what "nets" could be as part of an
> assisted definition since
> it seems to open a loophole for active use rather than passive.
>
> I think the ARRL rule 2.2.1 should be changed to start with the word
> "Passive" so that is says that "Passive use of spotting
> assistance..." and
> so on. Further, all contests should adopt the "passive"
> definition of
> assistance for consistency of understanding.
>
> So what do we call it when someone uses packet actively? He's a single
> operator, but now he's collaborating actively with others to
> improve his
> score.
>
> Well, if we accept the CQWW definition of being assisted, it's
> not single
> operator of any kind. So what is it?
>
> The answer is that the single-op has become a multi-op. That's
> right - it's
> not that he is now assisted, but instead he is now part of a virtual
> multi-operator team. A single operator is enlisting others to
> directly help
> his score. Hmmm.... we have more than one operator doing
> operating, logging
> or spotting functions. Multi-operator!
>
> So we have crossed the line into multi-op categories but this
> time we have
> multiple operators at different locations! This is not
> permitted! So, if we
> agree, anyone who does this type of operating should only submit
> a check log
> as they are clearly not single-op of any kind, and would be a DQ
> in multi-op
> categories for several reasons. (Multiple locations, multiple
> callsigns,etc.)
>
> What about the "hold my frequency for me for a few minutes"
> example? Clearly
> a multi-op activity. In a one-QTH multi, the other operator
> would sit down
> in the same chair for a while and hold the frequency while the first
> operator takes a break. Aside from them being at two locations,
> there is no
> difference in what is taking place. This is multi-op contesting.
> It is not
> being assisted.
>
> So what about other categories? The passive use of spotting
> networks should
> apply across all categories that allow it - not only single op
> assisted. No
> one should use packet actively during the contest regardless of entry
> category - aside from a check log. Multi-op should not be active
> users since
> to do so virtually adds others to your multi-op - at other
> locations which
> is not permitted. What about multi-ops holding frequencies for other
> multi-ops or single ops? This also should not be done for the
> same reason.
>
> Q: So how does one become assisted?
> A: Only if one connects to a spotting network of some kind and
> passivelyuses it.
>
> Q: What if someone randomly tells a single op that VY1 or Zone
> 18 is on a
> specific frequency? Is he assisted?
> A: No.
>
> Q: Why?
> A: He is not connected to a spotting network and is not
> passively using it.
>
> Q: What if he asked for the help or pre-arranged (colluded) with
> someoneelse to scan the bands for him or hinted during a CQ that
> he is still
> looking for a specific multiplier with the intention of causing
> someone else
> to "help" him? Is he now assisted?
> A: No - he is a multi-op!
>
> Remember: "one person performs all of the operating, logging,
> and spotting
> functions" is the rule for single ops. Such a person who
> solicits help is
> not assisted. Sure, he's receiving "assistance" in the generic
> sense, but he
> is not assisted by our clear definition of Single-op Assisted.
> This is a
> clear case of collusion. Again, he has crossed the line into
> multi-op and
> should be DQed if he submits his entry as a single operator.
> Perhaps if the
> assisted category was more accurately named as "Single Operator,
> PassiveSpotting Use" would resolve much of this apparent mystery.
>
> So, recognizing that some of these behaviors are multi-operator
> activitiesrather than single-op assisted makes it very easy to
> determine when a single
> operator crosses one of the two lines - into assisted or into
> multi-op.
> During a contest, there should be no category that permits
> active use of a
> spotting network.
>
> I welcome your comments.
>
> 73,
>
> Bob W5OV
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|